CUI_Johnson JA 2023_62.pdf

CUI//SP-PROCURE//FEDCON

Control No.: MICC 2023-62 original source for the continued provision of highly specialized services when it is likely that award to any other source would result in unacceptable delays of 8-12 months in fulfilling the agency’s requirements.

5. Reason for Authority Cited: Pursuant to FAR 6.302-1(a)(2)(iii)(B), when the supplies or services required by the agency are available from only one responsible source, or for DoD, NASA, and the Coast Guard, from only one or a limited number of responsible sources, and no other type of supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements, full and open competition need not be provided for and services may be deemed to be available only from the original source for the continued provision of highly specialized services when it is likely that award to any other source would result in unacceptable delays in fulfilling the agency’s requirements. After the initial draft submission, FORSCOM JRTC continually made changes to the Performance Work Statement (PWS) and other requirements package documentation which interrupted the process to realize the conclusive scope. This affected the ability of the contracting office to clearly express the requirement acquisition strategy which created delays in reviews and approvals. No other contractor can assume the current rotational training mission with full performance by 27 September 2023 without interrupting ongoing operations.

a. Background:

1) The current contract, W91247-18-C-0001, was awarded to CGDS on 14 November 2017 for a five-year period of performance (three-month phase-in period, a nine-month base period, and four 1-year options). The MSS supports approximately ten rotations annually that directly train combat units for future worldwide deployment to theaters of varying conflicts. Any interruption to JRTC’s mission of providing MSS to the mission partners would cause undue hardship by decreasing the level MREs and training support that would cause an irrevocable loss in combat readiness. Therefore, uninterrupted support from the incumbent contractor for an additional 13-month extension will allow operations to remain seamless until a quality follow-on contract is awarded.

2) The incumbent contractor, CGDS, was acquired by Valiant Integrated Services, and renamed Valiant Global Defense Services Inc. A modification to the contract was completed on 20 December 2018 under modification W91247-18-C-0001- P00011.

3) The approval of the Acquisition Strategy was scheduled for 31 May 2021 with the initial projection for contract award estimated at 16 September 2022. However, there were continuous delays in providing an actionable procurement ready package with the PWS and other supporting documents due to multiple revisions for various reasons.

JRTC and the MICC had defined milestones for the submittals, however, due to circumstances with information inputs, reviews, and approvals, the milestones were continuously missed. Every missed milestone at the beginning of the timeline carries mobilization, phase-in and GFP transfer costs for a short-term competitive bridge would result in a substantial duplication of costs of $16.8 to $25.2 million to the Government that is not expected to be recovered in an interim action. The expiration of the current contract on 26 September 2023 does not allow sufficient time to accomplish a competitive award. A contractor, other than the incumbent, does not have sufficient equipment or trained manpower readily available on short notice to seamlessly assume the performance of these ongoing operations. An award to any other source would result in unacceptable delays ranging from 8-12 months in fulfilling the FORSCOM JTRC requirements. Furthermore, this action is a temporary solution to facilitate the changeover of this requirement to the competitive award. Therefore, this alternative is not viable.

4) Extension of the current contract. Negotiating an extension to the current contract with the incumbent is the only viable solution to provide continuity of operations and technical support without jeopardizing the JRTC mission at Fort Johnson, LA.

Award to any other source would result in a delay of fulfilling the agency’s MSS requirements and would not be in the best interest of the Government.

c. Impact if not approved: Disapproval of the J&A will result in a lapse in service and a failure of FORSCOM’s JRTC mission. As discussed above, attempting to compete this requirement would result in unreasonable delays and would cause mission failure for FORSCOM JRTC due to the lack of services. An award to any other source would result in a substantial duplication cost of $16.8 to $25.2 million to the Government. These costs would include mobilization of a new vendor, phase-in of the new vendor, and transfer of Government Furnished Property between vendors; then likely incurred again when the follow-on contract is awarded in less than one-year.

6. Efforts to Obtain Competition: The Contracting Officer will publish the notices required by FAR 5.201 and any bids or proposals received shall be considered.

a. Effective Competition: This is a sole source action; effective competition is not applicable.

b. Subcontracting Competition: Valiant has an approved subcontracting plan. The Government will request a revised subcontracting plan covering the extension period and will coordinate review of this document with the Small Business Professional and Procurement Center Representative (PCR) as required by FAR 19.705-4(d)(7). The approved plan revision will be incorporated and made a material part of the contract as required by FAR 19.705-5(a)(5) prior to issuance of a contract modification. A copy of the award document will be provided to the Area Director for the Small Business Administration (SBA) Area Office where the contract will be performed as required by FAR 19.705-6(a) and a copy of the final negotiated subcontracting plan will be provided to the SBA PCR as required by FAR 19.705-6(c).

7. Actions to Increase Competition: This is an interim action to allow continued performance with the incumbent contractor during the time necessary to solicit, evaluate, negotiate, and transition to the competitive award.

8. Market Research: Market research was conducted by the MICC-Fort Johnson Contract Specialist in accordance with FAR Part 10 and in accordance with Defense Federal Acquisition Regulations Supplement (DFARS) 205.205-71, Only one responsible source, DFARS 206.302-1(d), Only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements, and DFARS Procedures, Guidance, and Information (PGI) 206.302-1(d). A sources sought notice was posted to the System for Award Management (SAM.gov) website on 02 May 2023, requesting vendor capability statements to provide this service. No responses or other requests for information were received.

9. Interested Sources: As described in paragraph 8 above, no other sources have written to express an interest in the acquisition. A proposal of this magnitude requires the contractor to invest significant time and dollars to develop the proposal, while knowing that the likelihood of success is uncertain. For a short-term contract, the risk is not appealing to contractors.

10. Other Facts:

a. Procurement History: The MSS requirement has historically been awarded to large businesses under full and open competitive procedures with a Cost-Plus-Award- Fee (CPAF) or CPFF contract type.

b. A CPAF contract, DABT60-96-C-0033, was awarded for $92.7 million on 30

September 1996 to Braddock, Dunn & McDonald (BDM) for a five-year period of performance (one-year base period and four 1-year option periods) from a full and open competition. BDM was acquired by Thompson-Ramo-Wooldridge, Incorporated (TRW) in 1997 and a bilateral novation modification was executed.

c. A CPAF contract, DABT60-01-C-0009, was awarded for $74.8 million on 01 August 2001 to Cubic Applications incorporated (CAI) for a five-year period of performance (60-day phase-in period, 10-month base period and four 1-year option periods) from a full and open competition. Due to an increase in the level of effort to support a rotational exercise, the value of the contract increased to $311.3 million, and the period of performance extended to 30 June 2007. The modifications were authorized by appropriate Justification and Approvals (J&A) under the cited authority of 10 U.S.C. §2304(c)(1) as implemented by FAR Part 6.302-1, Only One Responsible Source and No Other Supplies or Services Will Satisfy Agency Requirements.

d. A CPAF/CPFF contract, W911S0-07-C-0001, was awarded for $468.4 million on

1 July 2007 to CAI for a 10-year period of performance (90-day phase-in period, nine-month base period and nine 1-year option periods) from a full and open competition.

During the administration of the contract, the contract writing system, Procurement Desktop Defense (PD2), encountered systemic issues. The decision was made to issue a new contract number, W911S0-07-C-0007, to resolve the issues for the remainder of the contract term. Due to an increase in the level of effort primarily attributed to real world events with no way to fully anticipate the frequency and impact of the events on the rotational exercises, the value of the contract increased to $861.2 million.

e. Due to delays in awarding the follow-on competitive contract, a CPFF bridge contract, W9124E-17-C-0005, was awarded on 07 March 2017 to CGDS, under the authority of J&A (Control No. MICC 2017-10) citing 10 U.S.C. §2304(c)(1). The J&A was approved by the Principal Assistant Responsible for Contracting (PARC) on 16 February 2017 for performance 01 April 2017 – 23 October 2017. An additional delay in the competitive award required an extension of the bridge contract to 24 November 2017 and a 90-day phase-out period through 24 January 2018 under the authority of J&A (Control No. MICC 2017-61) citing 10 U.S.C. §2304(c)(1), approved by the PARC on 06 July 2017. A modification under the authority FAR 52.237-3, Continuity of Services was issued on 22 November 2017 to transition this bridge contract to the competitive award, W91247-18-C-0001.

f. Solicitation, W91247-13-R-0018, received four proposals and a CPFF contract, W91247-18-C-0001, was awarded to CGDS on 14 November 2017. Oak Grove Technologies, LLC filed a protest with the Government Accountability Office (GAO) (Docket B-415772.1) on 06 December 2017 disputing the award. A Stop-Work order pursuant to FAR 52.333-3 Alt I, Protest after Award, was issued to CGDS on 11 December 2017 directing them to stop all performance on the contract immediately.

g. However, the bridge contract W9124E-17-C-0005 full performance ended on 24

November 2017. The use of FAR 52.237-3 for transition services did not allow for the continuation of services at the full performance level through the protest resolution.

There was insufficient time to award a definitized contract to avoid a break in the critical services. Consequently, the Contracting Officer executed a Undefinitized Contract Action (UCA) to allow for continued performance in accordance with FAR 16.603 and DFARS 217-74. The UCA was definitized through bridge contract, W9124E-18-C-0001, issued to CGDS authorized by J&A Control No. MICC 2018-21 under the cited authority of 10 U.S.C. §2304(c)(2) and approved by the PARC on 02 February 2018 for performance through 27 April 2018 and a 90-day phase-out period through 27 June 2018.

h. The Army defended its award decision. GAO rendered a decision on 15 March

2018 denying the Oak Grove Technologies protest in its entirety. The Stop Work order was lifted by modification on 23 March 2018 for CGDS to resume performance on the $324.7 million award for a five-year period of performance (90-day phase-in period, nine-month base period and four 1-year option periods). CGDS was acquired by Valiant Integrated Services and renamed Valiant Global Defense Services Inc. and a bilateral modification was executed. Due to an increase in the level of effort to support a

11. Technical Certification: I certify that the supporting data under my cognizance which are included in the justification are accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Date: See Digital Signature

Chief, Contract Resource Management

12. Requirements Certification: I certify that the supporting data under my cognizance which are included in the justification are accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Director, G3, Fort Johnson

13. Fair and Reasonable Cost Determination: I hereby determine that the anticipated cost or price to the Government for this contract action will be fair and reasonable. This determination will be made using Cost Analysis in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(c) and comparison of previous cost estimates for the same or similar items. As a part of this basis, certified cost or pricing data will be required due to this being a non-competitive, non-commercial action exceeding the threshold for obtaining certified cost and pricing data established in FAR 15.403-4(a)(1).

Contracting Officer

14. Contracting Officer Certification: I certify that this justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Contracting Officer

Approval

Based on the foregoing justification, I hereby approve the procurement of Mission Support Services on an other than full and open competition basis pursuant to the authority of Title 10 United States Code §3204(a)(1) as implemented by Federal Acquisition Regulation 6.302-1(a)(2), Only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements. The estimated value of the modification is $ for a 13-month period of performance consisting of 12 months plus a one-month option from 27 September 2023 through 26 October 2024.

The approval is subject to availability of funds, and provided that the services or supplies herein described have otherwise been authorized for acquisition.

WADE C. COLE

Senior Contracting Official U.S. Army Mission and Installation Contracting Command, JBSA Fort Sam Houston, TX